THE GREAT TWO SEEDLINE CONTROVERSY
WAR IN IDENTITY
Today there is an all-out war of words being waged in the circles of Israel Identity. Parties on both sides of the issue have drawn a line in the sand, and ideological clenched fists are being shaken from indignant participants. Each participant, in his own way, is trying his best (or maybe his worst), in the most brutal manner, to draw ideological blood. They are aiming their rhetorical cutting words for no less than the proverbial jugular vein of their opponents in order to kill their damning heretical influence. Both sides go to long and contentious lengths in an attempt to prove their undying convictions on this subject. To these opposing adherents, there is no common middle ground for compromise, nor can there ever be any. This is a matter where one is either totally correct or totally wrong — no gray middle areas. Many may not have a complete knowledge of this subject, but will find themselves, eventually, on one side of the fence or the other. If one tries to straddle the fence on this subject, he will only find himself with his pants torn, and exposed in the most unseemly location. Like all controversies, there is usually a right and a wrong side to consider. We will be considering who is wrong on this greatest of all issues shortly.
The concept of Two Seedline is: that Satan once ruled to a high degree in the dimensions of Yahweh. In ages past, not being satisfied with his high position, he tried to usurp the position of Yahweh Himself. Satan (the shining one) convinced 1/3 of Yahweh's angels to join him in his rebellion. This rebellion is recorded in Rev. 12:7-9
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceived the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
If you will notice very carefully, if you have a KJV with a good center reference (cf. older World*, Southwestern* or newer Zondervan Classic*) this verse takes you to Genesis 3:1, 4, so there is no doubt here who the serpent of Genesis is. If you don't understand this connection with the above quoted passage and the serpent of Genesis 3:1, 4, you will have totally lost sight of the entire story. Yahshua the Messiah, being Yahweh incarnate, speaks of this, Satan's fall, in Luke 10:18:
I beheld Satan as lightening fall from heaven. (past tense — not something in the future.)
The concept of Two Seedlines further predicates that when Satan fell, with the rest of his satanic beings, they left the dimension of spirit and entered the dimension of the physical, as men. (Jude 6):
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their habitation (or principality, KJV center reference*), he hath reserved in darkness unto the judgment of the great day. (no longer having access to Yahweh's dimension)
We know these fallen angels were living at the time of Yahshua as men, as the center reference of the KJV* takes us to John 8:44 where Yahshua said to the "Jews":
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lust of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.
Another cross reference of the KJV* on Jude 6 is 2 Pet. 2:4:
For if Yahweh spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains (earth bound) of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.
That the fallen angles had the power to change themselves into the form of men is recorded in The Lost Books of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden, "Testament of Reuben", 2:18-19, page 223:
18 For thus they (the women) allured the Watchers (fallen angels) who were before the flood; for as these continually beheld them, they lusted after them, and they conceived the act in their mind; for they changed themselves into the shape of men, and appeared to them when they were (possibly not) with their husbands. 19 And the women lusting in their minds after their forms, gave birth to giants, for the Watchers appeared to them as reaching even unto heaven.
With this exceptionally outstanding passage, we can more wholly comprehend what it means in Jude 6, the fallen "angels which kept not their first estate." This passage also serves as a paradigm or model, after the fact, of what happened previously involving the satanic seduction of Eve in the garden of Eden. We are now more aware of the war which resulted in the fallen angels becoming earth bound or "chained", which is an essential element in the concept of Two Seedline doctrine. Now that we know who the players are, let's proceed with the narrative which resulted in the two seeds of Genesis 3:15.
MENTAL AND PHYSICAL SATAN SEDUCTION OF EVE
It is simply amazing the various unreasonable, preposterous, nonsensical and twisted arguments that opponents of Two Seedline teaching advance to secure their groundless, unfounded and insecure positions. I will be getting to examples of some of them shortly, after we briefly walk carefully, step by step, through the fundamental story. It starts with Genesis 2:16-17 where Yahweh instructs Adam before the creation of Eve. You see, there was already a danger that Adam might mess-up by eating of the forbidden fruit, even before Eve arrived on the scene. The important thing to see here is, Yahweh had a very important reason for instructing Adam at this time, for there were a lot of women unlike his kind (pre-Adamites) running around the garden to excite his natural manly instincts.
16 And Yahweh commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
The rest of chapter 2 concerns itself with creation of Eve, an "help meet" for Adam who was genetically the same as he was, or as Gen. 2:23 expresses it:
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: (same DNA) she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
You will notice a good cross reference system of the KJV* (as stated before) gives Eph. 5:30 on this verse and says:
For we are members of his (Yahshua's) body, of his flesh and of his bones. (same race)
To further establish the setting or background surroundings of this story, it will be needful to consider Genesis 2:8-9:
8 And Yahweh Almighty planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made Yahweh Almighty to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (3 kinds of trees in all)
We have to look for something here that has the knowledge of good and evil. This knowing good and evil is the earmark of angels. Therefore, this tree that has the knowledge of good and evil must be an angel of some rank. If Revelation 12:9 is true, he is the original organizer of the rebellion in heaven, the old serpent himself. For proof that angels have the knowledge of good and evil, I will quote from 2 Sam. 14:17:
Then thine handmaid said, The word of my master the king shall now be comfortable: for as an angel of Elohim, so is my lord the king to discern good and bad: therefore Yahweh will be with me. (check also v 20 and ch. 19:27)
THEN ENTERS THE SERPENT
Now that we understand that the tree of knowledge of good and evil and the serpent are the same thing, we are in a better position to understand who the players in this episode are, Let's see what Gen. 3:1-3 says:
1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Yahweh Almighty had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath Yahweh said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit off the tree which is in the midst of the garden Yahweh Almighty hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
If you will notice the KJV center reference* very carefully, you will find the serpent of Gen 3:1 is the same serpent of Rev. 12:9 that organized the rebellion against Yahweh. If you will notice again, the KJV center reference* indicates the serpent of Gen. 3:1 is the same serpent of 2 Cor. 11:3 which reads thusly:
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Yahshua.
Right away the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine are going to moan and groan, and say something like this, this passage is speaking of mental seduction only. Let's see if this supposition is true. Remember, this was the warning!:
But of the fruit off the tree which is in the midst of the garden Yahweh hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
EAT & TOUCH HAVE SEXUAL CONNOTATIONS
What was it that Eve did eat?, and What did Eve touch?
The word "eat" in the Hebrew is, #398, akal, to eat; also, to lay with. To prove that many times this is so, we will use some examples from Scripture. First we will use a supporting Scripture, Proverbs 30:20:
Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she EATETH, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.
Stolen waters are sweet, and bread [EATEN] in secret is pleasant.
And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did EAT, and bowed down to their gods.
With this last verse of Numbers 25:2, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary has this to say on page 145:
They called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods. The subject they is feminine, referring to the daughters of Moab with whom the men of Israel committed fornication. Balak, with Balaam's advice.
You can plainly see, the word "eat" (#398, akal) in Hebrew, in each of the above verses means sexual intercourse, which it also means in Genesis 3:3 where Eve is confronted by Satan. The scriptural passage we are scrutinizing is:
Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Not only does the word eat sometimes have sexual connotations, but also the word touch which is, #5060 naga, to touch; also to have sexual intercourse. We will use the following Scriptures to support this, Genesis 26:10-11:
10 And Abimelech said, What is this thou hast done unto us? one of the people might have LIEN (lain) WITH THY WIFE, and thou shouldest have brought guiltiness upon us. 11 And Abimelech charged all his people, saying, He that TOUCHETH this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.
And Yahweh Almighty said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to TOUCH her.
28 ...Let there be now an oath betwixt us, even betwixt us and thee, and let us make a covenant with thee; 29 That thou do us no hurt, as we have not TOUCHED thee (Rebekah), and as we have done unto thee nothing but good, and have sent thee away in peace...
So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; whosoever TOUCHETH her shall not be innocent.
Note: The word touch of Genesis 3:3 is the same #5060 as the word touch, touched or toucheth in these reference verses just quoted. Therefore, both the words eat and touch have sexual connotations, regardless of what the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine are touting. With these references, we can be safe to conclude that Eve had a sexual encounter with the serpent in the garden. Let the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine throw up their hands in horror and consternation all they desire to. It will not change scriptural facts. Genesis 3:13 says:
... And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
It is absurd to suggest Eve was beguiled to eat ordinary food when Yahweh had already approved of eating from garden-variety fruit trees (Gen. 1:29).
TREES? or TREES? or TREES?
The opponents of Two Seedline doctrine are always swift to counter with the argument, If Adam and Eve could eat of all the other trees of the garden, that would mean they could have sexual relations with anyone whom they desired. If trees represents humans in one place, it would have to represent humans in all other places, and this would be highly immoral! This is entirely a false assumption because sometimes the Hebrew is speaking of actual wooden trees, and at other times is speaking of idiomatic trees. I will refer to the Wilson's Old Testament Word Studies, by William Wilson, (a Hebrew reference book), page 453 under the heading "Tree."
1 ... strong, stout, mighty trees. 2 ... a tamarisk (flowering), myrica, tamarix, orientalis, Linn. Then perhaps any large tree, and collectively, trees, a wood, a grove. 3 ... a tree; often collectively, trees: Figuratively, trees represent men, green trees the righteous, dry trees the wicked, Ezek, xx. 47; xvii. 24, all the trees of the field, all men, the high tree, lofty and powerful, the low tree, the weak and contemptible. 4 ... pl. shady trees.
For more information on "men as trees walking", see Mark 8:24. All this demonstrates, if one wants to make a bona fide argument, one should know what one is talking about! If this passage meant Adam and Eve could have sexual relations with anyone in the garden, it would have said, "all the (proverbial) beasts or trees of the field." If one cannot separate the literal language from the idiomatic language of the Scriptures, one simply cannot understand the Bible. In such a case, it might be prudent not to have an opinion.
George M. Lamsa, (an expert on Bible idioms) in his Idioms In The Bible Explained, says this on the following:
Garden. Gen. 2:8 — Metaphorically — a wife; a family.
Tree of life in the midst of the garden. Gen. 2:9 — Sex; posterity, progeny.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Gen. 2:9 — Moral law; the knowledge of good and evil.
The tree of life. Gen. 2:9 — Eternal life.
The tree of good and evil. Gen. 2:17 — Metaphorically — sexual relationship.
WALKING THROUGH GENESIS 4:1, STEP BY STEP
We are now approaching one of the most misunderstood single passages of Scripture in the entire Bible. If we approach it too hurriedly, we will skip over it so quickly, we will never grasp its correct meaning. There was a time when I was persuaded Genesis 3:15 was a mistranslation, but with more research, I found it to be highly accurate. Let's now follow the proper sequence of events. Its all a matter of putting events in their proper order.
Once these events are placed in their proper order, all confusion with Genesis 4:1 disappears. Once we learn that Adam's knowing Eve had nothing to do with the birth of Cain, all becomes crystal-clear. In most cases, the logical conclusion that Cain was the son of Adam would be a proper one, but not with this verse. The conceiving in this verse had absolutely nothing to do with the bearing. Now let's read this verse in a new light, but of an old truth:
And Adam knew Eve his wife; — and (she next) bare Cain, and said, I have gotten my first (male child), a man to present to Yahweh as first born. 2 And she again bare his (˝) brother Abel. (Gen. 12:13)
I have changed the words a little to make the meaning eminently more evident and truth worthy. Once the true order of events of this verse is understood, it opens up a whole new understanding of what is happening in the world today. There is very substantial evidence that the "Jews" of today are descended from Cain. We have no less than the words of Yahshua the Messiah Himself concerning this. Once it is understood the "Jews" are devils walking around in shoe leather, we can begin to see the guiding hand of the great world conspiracy and all the monstrous problems we are faced with today. Without an understanding of Two Seedline, we are at a detrimental loss to know who the enemy is. This knowledge, or the lack of it, is the difference between the brightest day or the blackest night.
GENESIS 3:15, KEYSTONE OF SCRIPTURE
One of the very first things those opposed to a literal Satan-spawned physical seedline do, is point out the fact the information can be found in the Talmud. This is a sneaky deceptive method used by many, to declare guilt by association. The question must be asked: is every single word in the Talmud false? This idea is built on the assumption, that if it is found in the Talmud, it is automatically evil. For anyone who uses this approach, I would challenge them to prove every single word in the Talmud to be false. It can't be done, even though it is a collection of the most evil writings ever put together. Only a weak mind would accept totally such a flimsy premise. Not only is there evidence found in the Talmud substantiating the seduction of Eve, but evidence can be found in The Lost Books of The Bible and The Forgotten books of Eden, "The Protevangelion" 10:1-10:
1 And when her sixth month was come, Joseph returned from his building houses abroad, which was his trade, and entering into the house, found the Virgin grown big: 2 Then smiting upon his face, he said, With what face can I look up to the Lord my God? or, what shall I say concerning this young woman? 3 For I received her a Virgin out of the temple of the Lord my God! and have not preserved her such! 4 Who has thus deceived me? Who has committed this evil in my house, and seducing the Virgin from me, hath defiled her? 5 Is not the history of Adam exactly accomplished in me? 6 For in the very instant of his glory, the serpent came and found Eve alone, and seduced her. 7 Just after the same manner it has happened to me. Then Joseph arising from the ground, called her, and said, O thou who hast been so much favoured by God, why hast thou done this? 9 Why hast thou thus debased thy soul, who wast educated in the Holy of Holies, and received thy food from the hand of angels? 10 But she, with a flood of tears, replied, I am innocent, and have known no man.
SOME CITE THE SPIRIT & FLESH AS THE TWO SEEDS
This is one of the most ridiculous, misdirected applications of holy writ to come from one pretending to be inspired. It is so nonsensical, I will not affiliate the Sacred Name of Yahweh with it. If one believes the two seeds of Genesis 3:15 are such, this is the way the verse would have to read:
And the Lord God said to Eve’s flesh, Because thou hast done this, thy flesh is cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; and thy flesh shall go upon its belly, and dust shalt thy flesh eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between the flesh of the woman and the spirit of the woman, and between the offspring of her flesh and the offspring of her spirit, and the offspring of her spirit shall bruise the head of the offspring of her flesh, and the offspring of her flesh will bruise the heel of the offspring of her spirit.
Among other very important details the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine do not explain is: why is Cain left totally out of the genealogy of Adam? Genesis, chapter 5, gives the genealogy from Adam to Shem, Ham and Japheth, and Cain is not mentioned once! — Why??? Other genealogies in the Bible go into great detail and never leaves out a son! (especially a firstborn son). If you read Genesis 4:1 correctly, as depicted, it is not there either — Why is Cain totally left out??? Cain’s descendants are mentioned separately in Genesis 4:17-24 and it doesn’t list Adam as the father of Cain!!! — WHY???
The next place we find Cain in the Scriptures is Genesis 15:19 and we will have to read verses 18 through 21:
18 In the same day Yahweh made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: 19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, 21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
One of these nations among the Canaanites was the Kenites (#7017) which were descendants of Cain. Being that Cain was of the satanic seedline, he would infect his satanic blood among all these ten nations. And the "Kenizzites" were Edomites.
In the Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, page 116 we find this about this mixed group of nations spoken of in Genesis 15:19-21:
When the Israelites entered Canaan they found there a very mixed population generally designated by the term Amorite or Canaanite
The Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, Abridged by Ralph Earle, page 38, has this to say:
The Kenites. Here are ten nations mentioned, though afterwards reckoned but seven; see Deut. vii. 1; Acts xiii. 19. Probably some of them which existed in Abram’s time had been blended with others before the time of Moses, so that seven only out of the ten then remained.
The next mention of the descendants of Cain is found in 1 Chronicles 2:55:
And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.
The Wycliff Bible Commentary, editors: Charles F. Pfeiffer & Everett F. Harrison has this to say on page 8, and this quote will cover Genesis 3:14-15:
14. Cursed (’arűr) art thou. The Lord singled out the originator and instigator of the temptation for special condemnation and degradation. From that moment he must crawl in the dust and even feed on it. He would slither his way along in disgrace, and hatred would be directed against him from all directions. Man would always regard him as a symbol of the degradation of the one who slandered God (cf. Isa 65:25). He was to represent not merely the serpent race, but the power of the evil kingdom. As long as life continued, men would hate him and seek to destroy him. 15. I will put enmity. The word ’ębâ denotes the blood-feud that runs deepest in the heart of man (cf. Num 35:19,20; Ezek 25:15-17; 35:5,6). Thou shalt bruise (shűp). A prophecy of continuing struggle between the descendants of woman and of the serpent to destroy each other. The verb shűp is rare (cf. Job 9:17; Ps 139:11). It is the same in both clauses. When translated crush, it seems appropriate to the reference concerning the head of the serpent, but not quite so accurate in describing the attack of the serpent on man’s heel. It is also rendered lie in wait for, aim at or (LXX) watch for. The Vulgate renders it conteret, "bruise" in the first instance and insidiaberis, "lie in wait," in the other clause. Thus, we have in this famous passage, called the protevangelium, "first gospel," the announcement of a prolonged struggle, perpetual antagonism, wounds on both sides, and eventual victory for the seed of woman. God’s promise that the head of the serpent was to be crushed pointed forward to the coming of Messiah and guaranteed victory. This assurance fell upon the ears of God’s earliest creatures as a blessed hope of redemption.
The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, volume 3, page 782:
KENITES ... meaning (metalworkers, smiths). Clan or tribal name of semi-nomadic peoples of South Palestine and Sinai. The Aramaic and Arabic etymologies of the root gyn show that it has to do with metal and metal work (thus the Hebrew word from this root, "lance"). This probably indicates that the Kenites were metal workers, especially since Sinai and Wadi ‘Arabah were rich in high-grade copper ore. W. F. Albright has pointed to the Beni Hassan mural in Egypt (19th century B.C.) as an illustration of such a wandering group of smiths. This mural depicts thirty-six men, women and children in characteristic Semitic dress leading along with other animals, donkeys laden with musical instruments, weapons and an item which Albright has identified as a bellows. He has further noted that Lemech’s three children (Genesis 4:19-22) were responsible for herds (Jabal), musical instruments (Jubal), and metal work (Tubal-Cain, or Tubal, the smith), the three occupations which seem most evident in the mural. ... 2nd quote from the same article: The early monarchy. During this period a significant concentration of Kenites was located in the southern Judean territory. This is clear from 1 Samuel 15:6 cited above and also from David’s relations with them. ... Postexilic references. In 1 Chronicles 2:55 the families of the scribes living at Jabaz are said to be Kenites. Apparently, during the kingdom and exile periods, certain Kenites had given up nomadic smithing and had taken on a more sedentary, but equally honorable profession (?) of scribe.
Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, page 114:
The etymology of the name suggest that they were smiths or artificers, a theory which is supported by their association with the Wadi ‘Arabah, where there were copper deposits which had been worked by the Egyptians since the middle of the 3rd millennium.
The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary On The Whole Bible has this to say on Kenite, page 293:
The families of the scribes — either civil or ecclesiastical officers of the Kenite origin, who are here classified with the tribe of Judah, not as being descended from it, but as dwellers within its territory, and in a measure incorporated with its people.
The Matthew Pool’s Commentary On The Holy Bible has this to say on the Kenites, volume 1, page 778:
The Scribes; either civil, who were public notaries, who wrote and signed legal instruments; or ecclesiastical ... and are here mentioned not as if they were of the tribe of Judah, but because they dwelt among them, and probably were allied to them by marriages, and so in a manner incorporated with them. Which dwelt, or rather, dwelt; Hebrew, were dwellers. For the other translation, which dwelt, may seem to insinuate that these were descendants of Judah, which they were not; but this translation only signifies cohabitation with them, for which cause they are here named with them.
Clifton A. Emahiser' s Teaching Ministries
1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830
Please Feel Free To Copy, Or Order:
8 ˝ X 14 format. One sheet printed on
10 for 2.00; 25 for 3.00; 50 for 5.00 or 8.00 per 100